You include the Angelides (D) versus Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R)in your list of open seats... Clearly this is misplaced, since the "Guvernator" is an incumbant.

Lamont deserves the top position because he had so much focus on him, so much so that his campaign jumped the shark during the CT primary and never gained any momentum. In Lamont's defense, however, he was willingly abandoned by the Democratic establishment as they rather keep an insider like Joe among them then let an outsider like Ned in. Still, Lamont is ultimately to blame for his own failure.
Angelides at #10 fits well, as he deserves last place. Why the California Democrats chose a man that looks like Ben Stein to run against the Governator is beyond me. Image does indeed matter in politics, especially if we're dealing with California. I just don't get why the Democrats would rather run insider candidates like Angelides that can't win instead of giving an outsider that can win a shot. Just about anybody but Angelides could have taken on Arnie and possibly won. Instead, girly man Phil all but handed the governorship to Arnold the second Angelides won his party's nomination.

Lamont deserves the top position because he had so much focus on him, so much so that his campaign jumped the shark during the CT primary and never gained any momentum. In Lamont's defense, however, he was willingly abandoned by the Democratic establishment as they rather keep an insider like Joe among them then let an outsider like Ned in. Still, Lamont is ultimately to blame for his own failure.
Angelides at #10 fits well, as he deserves last place. Why the California Democrats chose a man that looks like Ben Stein to run against the Governator is beyond me. Image does indeed matter in politics, especially if we're dealing with California. I just don't get why the Democrats would rather run insider candidates like Angelides that can't win instead of giving an outsider that can win a shot. Just about anybody but Angelides could have taken on Arnie and possibly won. Instead, girly man Phil all but handed the governorship to Arnold the second Angelides won his party's nomination.

Great list. Ken Blackwell may be the worst candidate in the history of electoral politics going back to ancient Greece. His debate references to the "North American Man-Boy Love Club" demonstrated just how low the, uh, Christian Right can go. Ohio voters didn't bite.

I would place Ned Lamont's name at the #1 position, because his poor campaign will not only bring out Republicans to vote for Lieberman, but also also for Rs in the close House races in CT. So, Lamont may very well end up costing the Ds *3* races.

Boy Chris, you're really living in a dream world about Lamont. The strategy of his campaign is not going to matter much for Connecticut voters who have tended to support Liebermann heavily all along. All the Democratic primary vote indicated was that Lamont was heavily favored by the irrational, angry left. Now tomorrow it's the Connecticut voter's turn, for whom Lamont does nothing, despite Lamont not having a "controversial" stand on the Iraq war -- I love your revealing choice of words. :-)

I would have included Barbara Cubin on the list. It is not every day a candidate threatens an opponent confined to a wheelchair with MS.

Rob
http://robwire.com

We're going to roll over Ohio republicrat senator Mike DeWhine, too. And yes, the Pryce is wrong.

In Ohoho, we are going to rout the republicans.

We're going to roll over Ohio republicrat senator Mike DeWhine, too. And yes, the Pryce is wrong.

In Ohoho, we are going to rout the republicans.

How did you miss the Studebaker fiasco in Ohio against Mike Turner. With both candidate and her spouse arrested for domestic battery in mid summer, it was both entertaining and a mad scramble for the Democrats to pull togheter a post primary run.

Ken Blackwell deserves to get pounded tomorrow. He is a complete joke of a candidate. Further, the fact that he will lose by 20 or more points will bring down the rest of the Republican ticket, including Mike DeWine.

You better watch Blackwell's concession speach tomorrow night because it will be the last time you see him in Ohio politics. WOOOOHOOOOO!

I think the democratic will certainly take over both Senate and the House because the nation is totally disguised against the take-over the government by Evangelical people, who they themselves are the chirstendom. Like David Kuo said before, it is time for the Christ-like folks to go back and practice exactly what the Bible was meant to be. Check me at www.ogonipolitics.blogspot.com

It should be interesting to take a look at this article tomorrow night. I'm starting to get pretty damn excited!

read this take on the Corker ads in Tennessee..... we're not all crackers down here.

http://memphisflyer.com/memphis/Content?oid=oid%3A21205

'We'll work to help California in any way we can, and the best way we can is to be good citizens.' Bush, explaining why he won't establish price caps, allowing Enron to steal billions from California. Bush and Lay were quite close; Bush called him 'Kenny Boy' and Enron was his biggest contributor, 2000 presidential campaign. Same Bush that said Enron wasn't getting any help from the White House. The party framed Gray Davis for the problems and recalled him. Instead of investigating, the Republican controlled Congress followed blindly.

Sadly, Colleen Rowley (D-Minnesota 2nd) belongs on this list. She's a great lady and would do excellent work in Washington, but her campaign never got off the ground.

I guess the better question is: "how on earth can you live with the current reality?"

Answer: carefully maintained ignorance.

You all sound like defeatest, or Democrats however you prefer to look at it. Most of these posts seem to be preparing your argument in case the Dems don't take at least one house? Rigged voting machines, hick god fearers somehow finding the voting both, repeat calls from computers, corporate slaves.... I believe that all of this is a mask to cover your fears that while yes a majority don't approve of W or the war in Iraq policy, they fear Democrats even more. I guess I don't balme you. How could you live with that reality?

What about o'malley? What a joke of a campaign. He even managed to get smaller signs then elhrich.

Republican "fake phone call" scandal spreads - now in Philly too
by John in DC - 11/05/2006 09:39:00 PM

This is turning into a big story. They're doing it across the country - Kansas, NH, and now PA. This is the Republican October Surprise, launched in November. It's to cheat, pretend that they are Democrats calling voters and then piss the voters off so much that they don't vote for the Democrats.

That's called lying and cheating in order to suppress the vote, and it's illegal. And the Republican party admits they're doing it.

States in which GOP fake calls are happening so far:

Philly
Kansas
NH
CT
NY

As a registered "I," I think both of the major parties have long-since stopped serving the public and now focus only on winning at any cost. The plethora of smear campaigns every election gets worse each time, and the sheer content of the attacks gets more mind-boggling at each election.

The only positive example I can think of in the last 20 years was Cardin v Mfume in the D primary this year...aside from a few potshots at their financial supports, they didn't attack each other and for the first time in a long time, I wished I was registered with the Dems so I could vote for one of them. Why is that so hard to emulate? Can't we just ONCE want to vote FOR someone and not AGAINST the other guy? This is what we call DEMOCRACY? I call it playground politics, with some kids backing one halfwit bully and other kids backing another. They never talk about why they're qualified for the post, only why the other person isn't. Disgusting.

I don't think there should a "Top 10" worst campaign ads category: they all fit the description.

Mike: Agreed on Cardin's ads. I don't see what's so bad about them. And I have been continuously amazed at the Posties falling all over themselves to praise Mike Steele's flashy but content-light ad campaign.

And the ad featuring his sister is hideously bad.

Well, you're just wrong about Ben Cardin's campaign. Just because Cardin's not flashy and Steele is, doesn't mean that Cardin has run a bad campaign. Moreover, I have found Cardin's adverstisements to be among the most entertaining -- they are to the point, hard-hitting, and exactly the message that needs to be made.

Lieberman-Cheney--'08?

Joe, Say it isn't so---if you can

I'm suprised that Pennsylvania's Bob Casey Jr's nonexistant Senate campaign didn't make the top 10 worst list. He bombed both debates, and has the lamest tv commercials ever. His campaign is missing positions, ideas, and most important of all an accessible candidate. The one saving grace is his last name and looking similiar to his dad.

Do the "netroots" qualify?

A few days after Lamont won, "netroots involvement affecting outcomes" virtually disappeared from the news radar screen. I don't know about other blogs, but it virtually disappeared from The Fix also.

No MoveOn.org or any other similar operation has been apparent.

What happened to them?

Phillip: Don't send pedophile-enabling incompetents back to Speakership of the US House of Representatives. Stop selling the US Government to lobbyists (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/06/AR2006100600056.html). Pay as you go legislation. No more pork barrel spending. Implement the recommendations of the 9/11 commission.

Faux News never talks about any of those positions, do they? Deliberately maintained ignorance certainly is a blessing, ain't it?

Phillip: Don't send pedophile-enabling incompetents back to Speakership of the US House of Representatives. Stop selling the US Government to lobbyists (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/06/AR2006100600056.html). Pay as you go legislation. No more pork barrel spending. Implement the recommendations of the 9/11 commission.

Faux News never talks about any of those positions, do they? Deliberately maintained ignorance certainly is a blessing, ain't it?

I agree with Bobby Wightman-Cervantes.

Let me be clear: I agree with most everything everyone has posted here about the morally corrupt, fear-mongering Republicans. I'm hoping for a huge Democratic win.

I can't STAND the current government, and I hope the Republicans in office (all of them, for the most part) are voted out and sink in to oblivion. I think that the only differences between our (p)Resident (I've seen nothing presidential in this man's actions) and a mafia don is that (1) mafia dons live by their principles--twisted though they may be, but they still adhere to them; (2) mafia dons generally kill a lot less people than Bush has; and (3) they're often vastly more intelligent.

That being said, I have to agree with Bobby: where is our Democratic leadership? What ARE the plans to move forward? I hear generalities from the Dems, but with the exception of Barack Obama, I've not heard any real ideas. Why is it that a freshman Senator is the only one anyone can see some leadership in? So, yes, I agree with Bobby on a (currently) lackluster Dem leadership.

Here's why:

The 2004 election was the closest re-election race in American history.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election%2C_2004)

This means the G.W. Bush came closer (much closer) to losing his second term than any incumbent President in American History.

Yet, prior to the elections two vastly polarizing events happened: 9/11 and the Iraq War. These are the kinds of things that usually make voters turn out in droves and vote largely FOR a President they feel has handled the extremely upsetting events well, or largely AGAINST a President they feel hasn't. Yet the vote was squarely in the middle (50.8 to 48.3). Clearly, the American public didn't have overwhelming faith in GWB--but neither did they think Kerry was the man for the job. It seems very much to me like choosing the devil you know over the devil you don't.

Finally, then, here's my point: since there were clearly polarizing events that took place, and since it's clear by the voting polls that the American public wasn't polarized, it seems very much to me that the American people just didn't know what they wanted regarding the important decisions and issues at stake in the 2004 election. If they had, there would have to have been someone stepping up to embody those ideals, either genuinely or opportunistically, since there is no shortage of people who will espouse ideas--ANY ideas--for power or money.

But no one did. Kerry was lackluster and rather milquetoast in his approach to the issues at stake. Where was the leadership in a different direction? Not there, and it showed in the voting record.

Rigged voting machines? Absolutely possible. But for an election with issues that should have voters running in one direction or another, the rigging would have had to have skewed a percentage so large it couldn't have stayed hidden this long under the scrutiny this election has had (and continues to have).

Fear-, war-, and hate-mongering used to scare voters? You betcha. But where was the voice of reason to counter this? We can again point to Kerry, but is he the only Dem capable of talking? Just because he was the only presidential nominee for the Dems doesn't mean he's the only one who could get "the message" out. But there was no "message." If there was, what was it? Can anyone remember?

This current virus of Republicans absolutely has to go, no doubt about it. And I hope we have more balance in place after the elections. But if the Democrats don't start putting more effort into moving forward rather than pointing to the failed Republicans, we'll have a worse problem on our hands: paralysis. An inability to move because we're so mired in fear (R) and lackluster performance (D) that we've lost our bearings.

Phillip - get out of Iraq. Support stem cell research. Stop spending more and more money while cutting taxes. Stop torturing prisoners. Focus on domestic issues: energy independence, investing in higher education, minimum wage.

How are these not issues?

You people are unbelievable. D's won't win if they offer no alternative other than "we're not them". R's won't win if they screw things up. GW and Rove will be gone in 2008, who then will the D's use to scare all young D's at bedtime. If you want to talk issues, talk issues. If you want to blame it on the ref's I hope you keep losing because the comments are a entertaining and provide an interesting incite into your bankrupt beliefs. Scary R's will get you on Tuesday.

Loudon Voter,

I sure hope you're not a typical Democratic voter! ^_^ Read my earlier posts in this thread.

I must protest. Where are Rick Dog-Man Santorum and Curt It is all a liberal plot! Weldon?

Keith: You are beyond clueless if you see no racism in an ad like that.

I.e., typical Republican voter.

hi, i'm reading this from the UK and, to be honest, your system seems crazy!

then i compare to ours and think - what a terrific lottery it is!!

i like the adversarial nature of the campaigns, although i'm not so sure that it promotes gaining the right people in positions of power - right to the ultimate position

cheers

As a lifelong New Yorker, I see racism in that ad. It's not as overt as it could be, but then again, that's the malivolent brilliance of it. A slightly darkened hand is enough to speak to the racist voters while allowing for the GOP to claim it's not racist at all while a black hand would be overtly racist. In any case, it's more despicable nonsense from the "value" party.

As a lifelong New Yorker, I see racism in that ad. It's not as overt as it could be, but then again, that's the malivolent brilliance of it. A slightly darkened hand is enough to speak to the racist voters while allowing for the GOP to claim it's not racist at all while a black hand would be overtly racist. In any case, it's more despicable nonsense from the "value" party.

Maybe it's because I live in a place where the sun comes out, and maybe it's because my Northern European heritage family is filled with people whose hands are as dark as that. But, I think you'd have to be wanting to see the hand to be from some minority to make the accusation that it's racist.

I was puzzled why Asa Hutchinson ran such a bad campaign. He got the nomination somewhat by default after the death of Lt. Gov. Win Rockefeller and his campaign never got off the ground. Mike Beebe ran an excellent campaign from the start.

Rob
http://robwire.com

A white women with a brown-skinned man's hand over her mouth is NOT racist? On which planet?

Dems have less than 24 hours to publicize the extent of this scumbag robocall tactic of the Repubs. Their anything to win ways get more and more shameless each election.

The New York Republcan ad is stupid, and implies Democrats support violence against women but you'd have to be pretty sensitive to think it was racist. The Ford attacks, and Tan Nguyen's letter, THOSE are racist.

On Phil Angelides - I can't vote for him. His strong support of CA Prop 82 (which would have raised the tax rate on the richest to create universal child care) turned me against him. California has gone way too far down the path of specific funding decision being made via the proposition process (look at Prop 1A - which was put on by the legislature!!) The reformed Schwartzenegger is, in action, a moderate Democrat, and will be the first Republican I've voted for since voting for Pete McClusky thirty years ago.

The public outrage would be enormous on wednesday morning should the GOP somehow pull off numerous last-minute "miracle" comeback wins and hold both the house and senate. Clearly, our democracy would be in crisis mode in need of an overhaul. The House, it appears should be a slam dunk for the Dems, yet Rove and co. keep winking at each other. I'm suspicious.

And how about those GOP pols running for re-election while undergoing ethics investigations?

The GOP Scandal Source Sheet at
http://scootmandubious.blogspot.com/2006/11/gop-scandal-source-sheet.html

And as I posted last week even R's Andrew Sullivan and Christine Todd Whitman are calling on conservatives to vote Democrat - why? because the Republicans are neither conservative nor Republican - they are corporate slaves who use hate and division to do the business of the most anti-Americans you can find in this country today.

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes
www.balancingtheissues.com

One more point to defend my "R's OBVIOULSY cheat" theory: isn't this onslaught of sleazy, hate-mongering and prejudice engendering advertisments proof enough that they hold thier hold on power as considerably more important than democracy itself, let alone healing our wounds of national hatefullness?

If they can put out an ad like the one Drindle showed us, are they not capable of trying to "FIX" the election? If they can jam phone lines and harass voters illegally are they not capable of cheating on a digital level?

Every honest R needs to consider this question, and when they finally arrive at THE ONLY INTELLIGENT AND INEVITABLE CONCLUSION, they might remember what I have posted so many times...

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A DEMOCRAT TO VOTE FOR ONE!

November your problem is you do not read for substance just that which serves your purpose of get the "R" = I started out with Bush Denial and you translate that into me saying ONLY the D's are in denial

How do you get there from Bush Denial?

The issue posted by CC is worse campaigns - not do I think the R's are corrupt

What part of my NO GAY MARRIAGE example not translate into the "R'S" are a joke.

All of this is black and white in front of you and all you get is "he said something critical about the "D"'s so he must be a D hater"

This is why Congress is a do nothing group of worthless people - such as November they do not read for substance - listen for substance - or discuss based on substance.

My position on the R's is well document among the regulars

I need not defend myself to someone who deems substance as a fools game - or too hard to understand.

Do you work for CNN?

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes
www.balancingtheissues.com

Bobby;

I can see why you might be offended at the 9:17 post, but please consider my 9:19 post seriously, and give us some insight into your ideology.
The simple question is, do you not believe the R's are capable of systemic fraud?

Or is all of this just, as you propose so adamantly, just Dems in continual failure mode?

I think the evidence is preponderously leaning in favor of the corruption theory.

But if you think somehow ALL these polls are unreliable, and Rove has secret powers beyond the public's daily opinion, please explain why...

I just tried to post a comment that Terry Nelson should be scrutinized and improisoned for taking all those "caller ID" phone numbers from Rove while Rove was in the White House, and for the first time in a long time, it did not post.

Just want to see if this makes it to the blog..

Nelson and Rove let someone else take the fall for them in NH, but if the Dems take even one house, that series of phone calls to and from the WH (all of them on the public record) could be the most important evidence we can uncover, if we really hold or democracy sacred.

A poll on CNN:

'Will the Saddam Hussein death sentence influence your vote in the midterm elections?'

I guess the media really does think we are THAT simple and childlike and easy to manipulate. But a guess many are, otherwise R's wouldn't have been in power.

As for those robocalls, isn't it illegal to present yourelf as someone else? Can't the D's file a lawsuit against the producers and perpetuators of this scam?

Clearly, the R's have abandoned all pretention of moral values. Hopefully, the sheer hypocrisy will wake up some of the brainwashed W base, and they will find a moral alternative to this Republican sleaze.

The D's need an ad showing Foley, Bush and Bin Laden all on the same "page."

To November 6, 2006 09:17

Why is it when Bush is in Denial we call it Denial but when Democrats seek to have an honest conversation about our own shortcomings we are Republicans and those who refuse to accept our shortcomings are not in Denial?

You are in denial - it is that denial which the Republicancs love and allow them to win -

I am the type person who has no fear in confronting my problems and fixing them - as opposed to blaming the other guy

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes
www.balancingtheissues.com

Here's more atrocities:

'Terry Nelson, an unindicted co-conspirator in the TRMPAC Tom Delay scandal, and the boss of Jim Tobin, the convicted felon in the NH phone-jamming case, is the head of opposition research for the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. So it's not a surprise that these kinds of unethical dishonest tactics are being used.

Sources in Bergen County are reporting that an autodial robocall is being made that starts out sounding like a positive Bob Menendez message. If you hang up, it repeatedly calls you back. If you listen all the way to the end, it finishes by saying that Menendez is an embezzler and under criminal investigation.
This is a voter suppression tactic being used nationwide by the GOP. Initially callers will think they are hearing a call from the Menendez campaign asking for support. If they hang up, it will repeatedly call them back. The intention is to annoy the voter so much that they no longer support the candidate. For those who actually listen to the entire call, they are presented with a series of lies and smears against Menendez, also with the intention of suppressing turnout. It's a win-win tactic for them.

The NRCC is doing the same exact thing in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and at least 53 other races across the country.

Terry Nelson is a key GOP operative, a senior advisor to John McCain and someone heavily involved with both Tom Delay and Karl Rove. This guy breaks the law and gets rewarded for it. Democrats should make election reform a very core part of their agenda for a lot of reasons, but the rampant criminal nature of the Republican operative class is a pretty good rationale.'

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/11/6/81527/2073

Bobby;
"But no the Reputricans are coming back"

No offense intended, I just don't believe that is for real, though I think it may well be contrived.

And clearly, from your own post, they have even convinced many D's and I's that there is some new wave of mementum for the R's, and to me it just looks like another pre-emptive lie to cover the future lies like we saw in 2004.

Sorry, but as I see it, the R's haven't perfected anything but election fraud and dirty politics.

They are surely the master of both those factors.

But all the evidence blatantly suggests thier highly touted GOTV machine is really a deception, meant to cover thier tracks when the final results don't skew with the exit polls.

Which is why Bush keeps admonishing his cult members to go out and get thier neighbors to vote. They willclaim W saved the day, but it is really Diebold and whatever ERepublic now calls itself, manipulating the results on a digital level.

Why do you despise Democrats so much, Bobby?

The NRCC robocall scam is just one of dozens, hundreds operating around the country. This is how low the party of 'ideas' and 'values' has sunk. They have nothing to run on except base, irrational fear and hatred and racism -- and so their election campaign has shoveled millions into trying to corrupt democracy through voter suppression. Politics has always been dirty, but I think the utter moral bankruptcy and soullessness of the GOP today marks the bottom of the barrel.

Drindl;

Thanks for that last post, and for that blog link, it's a great site. I'm collecting them throughout the season, to build a desktop folder labeled "The Truth!"

Needless to say, there's nothing from Fox or Clear Channel in that folder!

This dispicable racially charged "rape" ad is one more proof the R's think dividing us at our most "base" level is now thier only remiaining key to hold onto thier pernicious political power.

They are all bouyed-up by the apparent effectiveness of that Tennessee Cracker ad.

Shame on the R's of Tennessee if this race gets decided on "race!"

I give the award for the worse campaign to the Democrats- while it is not over until the fat lady sings the numbers are dismal as to the Senate.

In 2000 rather than run a campaign on the good Clinton years Gore ran a campaign "I'm a victim of Bill too" - Bush won by a hair

In 2004 rather than stand up for himself Kerry allowed the liars at swift boat to destroy him and make him look weak - Kerry walked away from that election rather than fight.

Now we have the election in the bag and where is our leadership - hiding in caves like cowards

It is time for Pelosi to get a pair and standup for the party - this is who we are this is what we believe.

But no the Reputricans are coming back to be able to retain control of the Senate with the same old - NO TO GAY MARRIAGE - ignore the budget and how we are bankruptcing your future - NO GAY MARRIAGE - ignore the failed policies of Iraq - NO GAY MARRIAGE - ignore the corporate welfare going to the drug companies.

Pelosi, for her total failed leadership in this election which appears to be insuring the Reputricans hold on to the Senate should resign come Wednesday morning - the same for Howard Dean.

Other than their incompetence there is no excuse for the Dems not taking the Senate.

The worse campaign goes to the Democratic Party

Bobby WIghtman-Cervnates
www.balancingtheissues.com

Drindl: yes, it's too bad that the D's can't put together a similar postcard showing a young, terrified male with a gnarly old hand over his mouth. Or better yet, reverse psychology: same image but on the back "Don't let those Dem's take away our right to prey on Congressional pages! Send Denny Hastert back to Washington as Speaker!" Slap a picture of Mark Foley and Hastert at the bottom and you've have it.

Rozanne Ronen, a Barrington resident, got the call -- "Hi. I'm calling with information about Melissa Bean ..."
Then she got the call again and again and 18 more times, making for a total of about 21 calls since October 24.

"They are very annoying," Ronen said.

Pat Vockeroth, of Mount Prospect, received the calls too -- "Hi. I'm calling with information about Tammy Duckworth ..."

"If you only listen to the first sentence, you think they are from the Duckworth campaign," she said.

But the calls aren't paid for by Bean, Duckworth or even the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, they are paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee.

The NRCC acknowledged that it was the source of those Illinois calls but suggested a contractor was to blame for the repeat calls:

Jonathan Collegio, NRCC spokesman, acknowledged that the NRCC has paid for series of robocalls in the 6th and 8th districts, saying phone banking are part of any modern campaign.
"Phone banking is used by campaigns of all stripes and all these calls are made between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m.," he said.

Asked about the repetitive nature of the calls, Collegio said that may be a problem with the contractor.

"Because these calls are done by computers, it could be some kind of a glitch. This is all a matter of voter contact where we are trying to make sure people are aware of the upcoming election and make sure they vote the right way," he said.

Given that harrassing repeat calls have been reported in congressional districts around the country, it is unlikely that this is merely a contractor's "glitch." But the repeat nature of the calls was not immediately recognized as part of the NRCC's national robocall campaign. For instance, an AP report on the NRCC campaign which also appeared on November 1 focused on the fact that the calls had a tendency to mislead voters into thinking they came from the Democratic candidate, but made no mention of the fact that calls were being repeated multiple times in order to harrass voters and leave them with a negative impression of the Democratic candidate.

The NRCC robocall campaign thus flew under the radar exactly as intended.

Compare that mailer to the misogynist Corker ad, and its impact on Ford's campaign. Was it only a coincidence that the one significant outlier poll result (Corker 50 Ford 38) came out last week, only to be follwed by more consistent results (Corker 49 Ford 46; Corker 51 Ford 47) over the weekend?

I would guess this verdict against Saddam was planned long before the R's realized that bringing up Iraq was a no-no this close to the election.

And once again, consider this paragraph VERY carefully, put your Sherlock Holmes caps on, and then let me hear a group "DUH!"

"Second is the simultaneous inflation of mostly rural and suburban Republican votes, including the mythological influx of "last-minute evangelicals" who may well exist primarily in the memory cards of rigged electronic machines."

Wouldn't that explain Rove's confidence, in spite of all the reliable polls to the contrary?

Its one thing to have confidence, it is another to be absolutely certain in the face of contrary evidence.

I think this "Bush-live" last minute push that Novak laments may be setting us all up for another big lie, if the R's squeak out V's in those districts, they'll claim W "energized the base" again, which is just plain hogwash.

Bush may have amp up the manic energy to many already committed members(they should all be "committed") of his brainwashed base, but NO ONE I know believes that R's will win now, if they do it fairly.

Does anyone get the feeling that the only new people who might turn out for the R's are the ones who still believe All-Star Wrestling isn't staged?

Corker strikes me as the perfect Bush Republican--beady inbred eyes, a tweedly little hillbilly brogue, and a personal fortune amplified by sleazy backroom dealings while Mayor of (and this is the most perfect part) Chatanooga. In a just universe he would have been six years too late.

Okay, want to see the worse mailer of the election season?

Go here: http://blogs.nydailynews.com/dailypolitics/archives/2006/11/so_what_are_you_1.php

'If Democrats gain control of Congress, our values will be destroyed"

With a closeup photo of a young, terrified-looking white woman, with a dark-skinned man's hand over her mouth.

People have criticized me for saying republicans suffer from a moral sickness, but what else would you call this?

Vice President Dick Cheney will spend Election Day on his first hunting trip since he accidentally shot a companion last February while aiming at a covey of quail on a private Texas ranch.

... punchline, anyone?

The proposed VA marriage amendment is shocking and a very frightening move - the divisiveness is unacceptable. There are many heterosexual people who will vote for those law without understanding what it means and many of them will, at some point, be affected by it. Only then will they realize what they did to themselves. The opponents of the amendment have done a horrendous job of educating people about the amendment and what it means.
There is an initiative on the ballot in South Dakota - it is called the 'Jail 4 Judges initiative' and if passed, it would 'remove legal immunity from judges and other public officials and expose them to fines or imprisonment, based on a review of their decisions by special 13-member grand juries.'
This is extremely frightening for so many reasons I don't need to make clear here.

I live in a solidly Republican section of Florida. I have not seen a single Katherine Harris ad since the primary was over. Now I do not watch a lot of TV - football, morning news while getting ready to leave and 11 o'clock news. Others in the house watch a bit more and I catch bits and pieces of what is on. The TV has been innundated with ads for Charlie Crist and against his opponent (Republican for Governor). I also see a lot of ads for the Democratic candidates for attorney general and chief financial officer. There are a few ads for Jim Davis (Democrat for governor) and negative ads against the Democratic candidates for AG and CFO. I never see Harris ads, I do see a lot of ads for Bill Nelson. His ads are all upbeat, we need to work together across party line type ads. I also do not see many bumper stickers or yard signs for Harris. I see a lot for local candidates and for Charlie Crist. Harris is in danger of losing here in Northeast Florida. The only section she seems to have a shot at carrying is the rabidly Republican panhandle. She may have trouble garnering 40% of the vote.

Second is the simultaneous inflation of mostly rural and suburban Republican votes, including the mythological influx of "last-minute evangelicals" who may well exist primarily in the memory cards of rigged electronic machines."

I was glad to read that in Che's post, I know many others who share this suspicion, and it needs to be considered very seriously. If true, it would explain the glaring and very questionable gap between the exit polls and the final results in 2004.

Also, check out Bob Novak's article today here in the WaPo, when I was posting yesterday that Bush visiting these R's at this point in the game will only shore up the base, but will not gain new voters.
Second is the simultaneous inflation of mostly rural and suburban Republican votes, including the mythological influx of "last-minute evangelicals" who may well exist primarily in the memory cards of rigged electronic machines."

I was glad to read that in Che's post, I know many others who share this suspicion, and it needs to be considered very seriously.

Also, check out Bob Novak's article today here in the WaPo, when I was posting yesterday that Bush visiting these R's at this point in the game will only shore up the base, but will not gain new voters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/05/AR2006110500776.html

"At Sellersburg in southern Indiana on Oct. 28, George W. Bush began 10 days of nonstop campaigning for his party's congressional candidates. That posed a Republican conundrum. Since GOP policy aimed to prevent Democrats from "nationalizing" scattered congressional elections, what was the president doing in the national spotlight crowding out House and Senate candidates? Wasn't he playing into Democratic nationalizing efforts?

The approved answer given to me by high-ranking Republican political operatives is that Bush was really furthering the local campaigns and local issues. Actually, the president was trying to change the subject nationally from Iraq to national security. But experienced Republican political leaders privately grumble that Bush has only underscored Iraq as the preeminent issue, adding that he would have done better to get lost for the past two weeks."

And as for the worst-run campaigns by a challenger, give that to the DCCC for not finding a broader use of thier resources from the start.

Emanuel is not the problem, though, many of the people around him who give him advice were more concerned with benefitting thier friends in the big TV media markets, so he may not have gotten the best advice because of that not-so-hidden agenda.

And as for the Chris twins and thier infatuation with some of these R campaigns and characters, we know where their loyalties "lie," so we can only just adjust, and read between the lines.

But these Steele enamoratives simnply reek of personal favors.

And yes, I do invent words, quite often.

Do I need to put a definition on "enamoratives?"

Virginia voters go to the polls in the next few days to decide whether to amend their constitution not only to ban gay marriage, but also to refuse to recognize any legal arrangement between "unmarried individuals"--gay or straight--that confers marriagelike benefits. The ballot initiative is shocking not only in its bigotry against all unmarried couples, but in its attempt to transform a constitution--a document meant to lay out our highest freedoms and aspirations--into a vicious cudgel to separate "us" from "them."
The voters of Virginia have already made their feelings about gay marriage perfectly clear: State statutes already prohibit both civil unions and marriages between same-sex couples. Laws on the books already nullify marriages or civil unions entered into in any other state. So, having blocked any last road to Virginia recognizing a same-sex marriage, a civil union, or an out-of-state or Canadian gay marriage in Virginia, our cynical legislators have gone one step further: They propose doing away with adoption laws, custody arrangements, medical directives, or domestic-violence statutes with which both heterosexual and homosexual families protect their children and property.

BBC:

'When it came, the president's response was measured. He called the verdict a milestone.

He pointed out that the lawlessness of Saddam Hussein's rule had now been replaced by the rule of law - and then he delivered the punch line: "Had it not been for the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, this verdict would never have happened."

I don't think any American would dispute this assertion. But one morsel of "good news" doesn't make a loaf.

Remember this is at least the fifth milestone we have had in Iraq: there was the toppling of Saddam's statue, the first election, the capture of Saddam, the second election and constitution.

And every time the violence got worse, the landscape bloodier, the prospects of victory dimmer.

After three-and-a-half years of euphoria degenerating into agony, the vast majority of Americans have made up their minds on Iraq and Sunday's verdict will not change it before Tuesday.

The news may persuade a few leaden-footed Republicans - crying into their beers over budget deficits, sex scandals and a mismanaged war - to shuffle to the polls.

It could even make the difference in marginal Senate seats like Missouri, Virginia or Montana, which are too close to call and could tip either way.

But the verdict also puts Iraq, warts and all, back on the front pages.

It invites uncomfortable comparisons between the rule of law in court and the lawlessness of death squads roaming the streets of Baghdad.

Went to another Cardin rally last night - Pres. Clinton showed up for a last minute GOTV gathering. Cardin actually sounded pretty good - he might pull it out tomorrow night, but it will be closer than anyone imagined - too close for a blue state like MD. I still see this one going to Steele - its not rocket science to say that it is all about the ads, but it is the truth of it. . .

I say give kathy harris the Bad Kharma award for running possibly the most clubfooted, humiliating campaign in history. Just punishment for her culpability in installing the worst president in history.

She that sows the wind, reaps the whirlwind.

'Steele's are vibrant, unorthodox and eye-catching.' Umm, gag. Does Chris have a crush on Steele or something. He sounds like Chris Mathews with his adoration of John McCain's 'manliness.'

Just dpon't read the, folks, I've said it before, if you start administrating the "Che's" off a blog, you willlose readership.

Just scroll past a Che post if you don't like it, but you folks, are wasting as much time and space complaining as the long posts.

JUST IGNORE THEM!

Use your ability to choose, but don;t try to exclude anyone, unless they are outright profane or libelous.

Che may need to come up with more of a synopsis, but should not be discouraged from passing along information considered important.

Perhaps you missed the "Richie Rich" Tarrant (R) race for the open Senate seat (to replace the retiring Jim Jeffords), against Bernie Sanders (I). Tarrant has essentially self-financed a campaign that has been totally ineffectual. Tarrant stands to set a nation-wide record for most dollars-per-vote-received, having spent about $7 million. He may not crack 30% of the vote total.

Agree. These long posts that advertise should be blocked.

The title easily goes to Kathleen Harris. Even the Bush family which owes "W"'s presidency to her found Kathleen's campaign toxic.

http://intrepidliberaljournal.blogspot.com

Yes a link would have been more then enough.

The previous post is spam. It should be deleted, the poster doesn't have the right to clog up this blog.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.